Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
this has been done before but people always talked about COL as the only factor on their decision in those posts. if it weren't for that, where would you rather live? who wins without factoring in the cost of living?
includes entertainment
daytime activities
scenery
nightlife
shopping
dining
etc.
Chicago. I like San Francisco, especially the built environment, but I feel like I would feel so out of place living there, especially being African American. Nothing against the people there, but the cultural things like restaurants, nightlife, and a few other thing would be lacking for me personally.
I lived in Chicago but did not live in SF( visited countless times). Chicago hands down. Great architecture, cleaner, chicagoans are way friendlier, better food, better transit, and more affordable.
I live in and like Chicago, but San Francisco has better weather and many interesting places to visit outside the city limits. Chicago is pretty much just Chicago.
I prefer San Fran if cost of living was no factor because of the weather and scenery, Chicago is too cold for me during the winter but if it came down to cost of living as the only factor then Chicago if not SF.
If SF had Chicago's cost of living, it would be much better.
If SF had Chicago's COL it would be a very different place. The only things I prefer about SF are the mountains/hills and the weather between December and February. Everything else I give to Chicago.
I see both places for what they are. Two huge and important cities both to the United States and the world. Two incredibly important economies (more so the San Francisco Bay Area). Two incredibly developed cities by food, culture, park systems, and the like. They are both Top 5 in the United States and both offer peak big city living in America for Americans. Both are world class cities.
That being said, I wouldn't live in either, here's why (in my opinion);
- Chicago: First of all, I have a problem with living in the city and paying taxes there (I grew up in Chicago). I don't want those scum trash that run the city of Chicago to even get a penny of my money. Those incompetents mismanage, lose it, or do some other corrupt thing with those funds. I would never stand for that. The city also has lots of social issues, but I'll save that for a DM if anyone wants an explanation. Not here to put this city down (just its politicians). It also has traffic, congestion, and other issues and I'd be up for putting up with that if it offered the vibrancy and urban big city experience of New York, which it doesn't. So to me personally, it isn't worth it with the baggage it comes with. If the city can clean up the dirtbags that inhibit public office in Chicago, make a legit effort to improve the city for both Northside and Southside (as well as the much neglected Westside), then I'd be all for it. Like I said, when you remove all the issues the city has, then its a true world class global city and for America, one of the absolute best places there is. Actually it is great even with those issues, just not great enough for me to want to live there. That being said; Go Cubs, Go!!
- San Francisco: The traffic is the worst I've ever experienced in North America and I haven't ever felt anything as bad as the stretch in San Francisco proper from Fulton to California Avenue (and especially bad near Geary). Just about everyone seems to drive below the speed limit for some reason, I don't even understand why. The traffic is horrible all around the San Francisco Bay Area. I used to think that people that complained about traffic in cities all over the world are listing an insignificant negative point, then my life introduced me to the San Francisco Bay Area. The congestion issues are crippling in the San Francisco Bay Area. I went to buy a bottle of water at the Safeway across the street from Japantown on my last visit, I left the store an hour later because that's how long it took. Everywhere we went, nothing was fast service, everything was slowed down. Even BART was slow to cross the Bay from Oakland to San Francisco for a heavy rail rapid transit system. These two issues, along with a lack of housing supply and just plain awful for parking situations ultimately cross San Francisco and its entire Bay Area off the list for me. If the region can improve general mobility and increase spending on infrastructure and get infrastructure to accommodate its present size and state, then I'd be all for it. Outside of that, what a remarkable area, truly, has it all.
Yes the traffic in SF has gotten so absurd that it literally affects our day. At least thats how I feel.
However I still think LA and NYC are much worse.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
